Title
Arguilles vs. Wilhelmsen Smith Bell Manning, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 254586
Decision Date
Jul 10, 2023
Seafarer injured during recreational basketball on vessel; injury deemed work-related under Bunkhouse Rule and Personal Comfort Doctrine. Disability lapsed into permanent due to lack of timely assessment, granting compensability.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 254586)

Key Dates

• June 15, 2016 – Employment contract executed.
• July 24, 2016 – Deployment commenced.
• December 26, 2016 – Injury occurred while playing basketball aboard ship.
• January 18, 2017 – Medical repatriation to the Philippines.
• February 6, 2017 – Surgical repair of the ankle.
• June 28, 2017 – Alleged “fit to work” note by company-designated physician (submitted belatedly).
• April 30, 2018 – Labor Arbiter decision awarding total and permanent disability benefits.
• October 17, 2018 – NLRC decision reducing but affirming compensability.
• January 23, 2019 – NLRC reconsideration order dismissing the claim.
• January 24, 2020 – Court of Appeals decision affirming dismissal.
• November 9, 2020 – Denial of CA motion for reconsideration.
• July 10, 2023 – Supreme Court decision under the 1987 Constitution.

Applicable Law

• 1987 Philippine Constitution
• 2010 POEA Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC)
• NSA-AMOSUP/NSU Collective Bargaining Agreement
• Republic Act No. 8042, as amended by R.A. No. 10022
• Rule 45, Rules of Court

Antecedents

Petitioner passed pre-employment medical exams and boarded M/V Toronto. During off-duty hours but on-board, he was injured playing basketball. Ship’s master reported a suspected torn Achilles tendon; petitioner was repatriated and underwent MRI confirming a high-grade partial tear. He received surgery and 49 physical therapy sessions. Respondents ceased treatment after 120 days, prompting petitioner to secure an independent medical report declaring him unfit for sea duty.

Procedural History

  1. Labor Arbiter (LA) Hernandez (April 30, 2018): Found the injury work-related under the “Bunkhouse Rule,” declared disability permanent and total, and awarded US $90,000, moral/exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees.
  2. NLRC First Division (Oct. 17, 2018): Held the injury compensable but reduced benefits to US $9,405 and P100,000 damages, citing lack of permanence/totality.
  3. NLRC Reconsideration (Jan. 23, 2019): Admitted belated company-designated physician note and reversed its prior ruling, dismissing the claim for lack of work-relation.
  4. Court of Appeals (Jan. 24, 2020; Nov. 9, 2020 RC denial): Affirmed NLRC’s dismissal, ruling the injury non-work-related.
  5. Supreme Court (July 10, 2023): Grants Rule 45 petition, reverses CA and NLRC, and reinstates LA decision with modifications.

Issue

Whether petitioner’s ankle injury, sustained during on-board recreational activity, is compensable as work-related under the POEA-SEC and collective bargaining agreement, and whether respondents breached the 120/240-day period for final disability assessment, thereby entitling petitioner to total and permanent disability benefits.

Arguments

• Petitioner: Injury occurred in the course of employment under the “Bunkhouse Rule” and employer-sanctioned recreational policy; respondents failed to render a final medical assessment within 120 or 240 days, making the disability total and permanent by operation of law.
• Respondents: Injury was off-duty and unrelated to work; petitioner was declared fit by the company-designated physician; submitted belated evidence to that effect.

Rationale

  1. Jurisdictional Scope: Although factual findings are generally beyond Rule 45 review, conflicting conclusions among LA, NLRC, and CA permit Supreme Court examination under its equity jurisdiction.
  2. Work-Relation Principles:
    a. Bunkhouse Rule – Seafarers required to live aboard and use employer-provided facilities remain in the course of employment during on-board activities.
    b. Personal Comfort Doctrine – Acts of personal comfort reasonably necessary on the premises (e.g., sports) are incidental to employment.
    c. POEA-SEC Definition – “Injury arising out of and in the course of employment” includes injuries sustained aboard during contract term, regardless of duty status.
  3. Presumption of Compensability: Employer bears burden to prove willful or criminal employee act caused injury. No evidence of negligence or intentional breac

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.